Current a level students won't get a pension till 77... Lets cut boomers pensions NOW

ruggedtoast

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well I've found it hard to find them? Where are these posts?

I think all this thread does is highlight how seflish we ALL are when it comes to taking out what we think were entitled too.

Everyone is about themselves. No one is about their children or their children. Were all in it for as much as we can take, for as little as we can put in. Natural I suppose.

There are different kinds of selfishness though Graham. Am I selfish? Yes I am. I live in a country that affords me a lifestyle which the majority of the world's 6 billion people will never have due to poverty.

Not particularly far away in Africa, adults and children are dying of poverty. Am I selling my car and TV and giving the proceeds to Water Aid? No.

I do however at least acknowledge that this system is unfair and corrupt and there is nothing special about me other than serendipity.

With the baby boomer generation we have an establishment that was unprecedentedly wealthy anyway in the history of histories, but then much of that wealth came from writing cheques for their kids to sign for.

Now the piper needs paying and paying we are. We're losing child support, we lost child tax credit, we lost the chance for many of us to own a house, we lost social housing, we lost grants for tuition fees, grants for living costs, we lost the EMA, and we lost the kinds of jobs that provided the post war generation the wealth that they received.

But when it comes to someone suggesting cutting unfunded pensions for retirees because 800 a month for a couple with no other outgoings plus winter fuel allowance, unlimited health care and free bus travel is unaffordable, they rage and thunder about ageism.

When is it their turn to start cutting back?

grizzly1911

ruggedtoast wrote: »

But when it comes to someone suggesting cutting unfunded pensions for retirees because 800 a month for a couple with no other outgoings plus winter fuel allowance, unlimited health care and free bus travel is unaffordable, they rage and thunder about ageism.

So this is just for them to go out and get ratted on is it. No other obligations. Council Tax is just wiped clean,? No rent or property maintenance to pay/no energy bills to pay? No food, groceries, clothing, dental treatment, glasses (eyesight) to buy?

Many (most?) pensioners live on their own so don't get that mystical £800 but still have the overheads.

Governements aren't generous in any colour. Basic pension reflects subsistence + a little. It isn't a gravy train.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

There are different kinds of selfishness though Graham. Am I selfish? Yes I am. I live in a country that affords me a lifestyle which the majority of the world's 6 billion people will never have due to poverty.

Not particularly far away in Africa, adults and children are dying of poverty. Am I selling my car and TV and giving the proceeds to Water Aid? No.

I do however at least acknowledge that this system is unfair and corrupt and there is nothing special about me other than serendipity.

With the baby boomer generation we have an establishment that was unprecedentedly wealthy anyway in the history of histories, but then much of that wealth came from writing cheques for their kids to sign for.

Now the piper needs paying and paying we are. We're losing child support, we lost child tax credit, we lost the chance for many of us to own a house, we lost social housing, we lost grants for tuition fees, grants for living costs, we lost the EMA, and we lost the kinds of jobs that provided the post war generation the wealth that they received.

But when it comes to someone suggesting cutting unfunded pensions for retirees because 800 a month for a couple with no other outgoings plus winter fuel allowance, unlimited health care and free bus travel is unaffordable, they rage and thunder about ageism.

When is it their turn to start cutting back?

so how much do you thing a pensioner should have to live on?
how much do you think a child ought to have spent on them?
how much do you think a person of working age ought to have to live on?

GeorgeHowell

A lot more nonsense being talked here of course. A recurrent theme seems to be "taking out a lot more than they put in".

What does that mean ? What is included in the "putting in" side of the equation and in the "taking out" side.

Most baby boomers will have paid an amount of tax during their lifetimes -- income tax, VAT, etc etc. And they have "taken out" various things that are state funded out of general taxation, including the state pension for those already old enough. Who can possibly say with any authority that any individual has taken out more than they put in, or that it applies to a whole group of individuals ? It's a nonsensical question that can only have a nonsensical and trumped up answer.

I suspect that the real bone of contention as usual is house price inflation and more affordable housing in the past compared with now.

The thinly veiled calls for punitive, confiscatory taxation of the baby boomer generation in order to fix this perceived injustice no doubt comes from those who believe in such taxation as a matter of course. These are the Marxist and quasi-Marxist indivduals who believe in redistributionary taxation imposed on anyone who is "rich" (ie who has more than they do). We all know what the imposition of Marxist type political systems had led to in the past, but there are still many people, eaten up with envy and grievance, who cling to this philosophically, morally bankrupt, obsolete, and discredited creed.

ruggedtoast

grizzly1911 wrote: »

So this is just for them to go out and get ratted on is it. No other obligations. Council Tax is just wiped clean,? No rent or property maintenance to pay/no energy bills to pay? No food, groceries, clothing, dental treatment, glasses (eyesight) to buy?

Many (most?) pensioners live on their own so don't get that mystical £800 but still have the overheads.

Governements aren't generous in any colour. Basic pension reflects subsistence + a little. It isn't a gravy train.

There are plenty of working families who would love to have £800 clear after they've paid their rent. If you think having this as a handout from the government isn't a privilege I don't honestly know what to say to you.

Anyway, as we're constantly told how hard working and prudent and good at saving you all are compared to the f3ckless and indolent youth, I'm sure not many of you are just planning on a state pension to get by. Surely?

StevieJ

I blame the parents

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

so how much do you thing a pensioner should have to live on?
how much do you think a child ought to have spent on them?
how much do you think a person of working age ought to have to live on?

It doesnt matter what they should have, its a matter of what there is to give them. Its pretty obvious who is getting the most out of the taxpayer.

I have no problem with providing a dignified retirement for people who are actually poor but that isnt the majority of the people who will be retiring over the next decade.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

It doesnt matter what they should have, its a matter of what there is to give them. Its pretty obvious who is getting the most out of the taxpayer.

I have no problem with providing a dignified retirement for people who are actually poor but that isnt the majority of the people who will be retiring over the next decade.

OK
let me re-phase the question

given our current circumstances and taking into account all known facts about population change, global warming, banking sector, rise of China and India etc etc

what do you think should (we can afford) be spent on children?
what do you think people of working age should have?
what do you think people over pension age should have?

Linton

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

....

The thinly veiled calls for punitive, confiscatory taxation of the baby boomer generation in order to fix this perceived injustice no doubt comes from those who believe in such taxation as a matter of course. These are the Marxist and quasi-Marxist indivduals who believe in redistributionary taxation imposed on anyone who is "rich" (ie who has more than they do). We all know what the imposition of Marxist type political systems had led to in the past, but there are still many people, eaten up with envy and grievance, who cling to this philosophically, morally bankrupt, obsolete, and discredited creed.

Your case, sound as parts of it may be, would be even more convincing if you didnt classify everyone you disagree with as Marxist, a politial/economic philosophy about which you seem to know very little. As to redistribution, the main purpose of any administration anywhere has been to move money from one set of people to another, against the natural flow of the market. So even before Tudor times there was the Poor Law whereby parishes were responsible for preventing the destitute from starving and providing the homeless with accommodation.

Of course those most against this are those who would lose out so any democratic government must ensure that the majority gain.

grizzly1911

ruggedtoast wrote: »

There are plenty of working families who would love to have £800 clear after they've paid their rent. If you think having this as a handout from the government isn't a privilege I don't honestly know what to say to you.

Anyway, as we're constantly told how hard working and prudent and good at saving you all are compared to the f3ckless and indolent youth, I'm sure not many of you are just planning on a state pension to get by. Surely?

But the £800 isn't clear after they have paid their rent in many cases, they have to pay rent out of it. For many property maintenance activity costs a lot more as you get older as you physically can't do all of it yourself. Many retirement properties come with a heavy service charge. Of course single pensioners don't get anywhere near that, which you choose to ignore.

It isn't really a privelege or handout for mos it has been earned. They have already contributed through taxation in their lifetime that paid for "society" as they went too. Pensions haven't just been started for this current/coming generation.

What other preparations people of made is irrelevant. They will pay whatever tax and forgo other benefits as the government of the day sees fit.

It is a good job many have saved and made provision for themselves as things would be much worse, for all in society, if they simply relied on "handouts"